They Require You to Make Decisions by Consensus
The word ‘consensus’ probably has about as many working definitions as the word ‘participation’. And about as many problems associated with it too. The real problem is not consensus but the different definitions that we apply to it. Definitions that can be used like weapons to slow things down, manipulate thinking and generally turn a team into a plodding, boring nightmare.
One of the biggest misconceptions about coming to decisions by consensus is the belief that everyone on the team must AGREE with the decision. This is fatal since it allows those team members with personal agendas or pet peeves to stand up in their self righteous glory and whine that the team can’t move forward because THEY don’t agree with the decision. Don’t you hate it when that happens!?
Even though the word consensus is a noun it should be treated as a verb, a word of action. The end point of consensus is that everyone will actively support the decision made. You may not AGREE with the decision but you accept that your points have been heard and considered and that the team must move on. Given this, you will do what is needed to actively support the decision. When you use consensus in this way there isn’t much room for whiners.
There is often great discussion and sometimes even good fights as different points of view are expressed with real passion. Everyone agrees that a decision must be made and that if the team is to move forward, as a team, everyone must support that decision. If you complain about the decision to others, outside the team then you don’t have consensus, you have cowardice or dishonesty and your team is in deep trouble. Consensus requires courage and honesty. If your team lacks these qualities, make decisions by some method other than consensus. You will have to deal with similar issues but at least they won’t take as long to surface.
It’s curious how often teams are expected to decide by consensus, when most other organizational decisions in organizations are not made in this way. Decisions in organizations are generally made by the person with the greatest power, no matter how camouflaged this may be. So why on earth should teams be different? This is not to say that consensus isn’t a great way to make decisions, but it is useful to be aware this approach goes against the normal and well learned traditions of the organization. It will not be easy and there will be times when it just doesn’t fit the situation.
People in organizations have power and one of the consequences of this is they can make decisions by themselves. If your team is operating in this type of situation there will be many times when it is most effective to make decisions in the traditional way; it’s normal and it works. Consensus should not be an etched in stone rule or an unquestioned approach, but one that fits the situation.
Discussion and comment points for this post:
Why do you think many teams assume they should be making decisions by consensus?
Have you ever made a team ground-rule that you would make decisions by consensus only to discover each team member had a different definition of what that meant? Tell your story.
When a team does use consensus do you think they should also talk about what active support for the decision looks like? What do you think it should look like?
Comments